New Criteria requires "publicly accessible"
donandlan-PGO Posts: 201 ✭✭✭
edited December 2020 in Criteria Clarifications
The new criteria referrences the requirement for waystop submissions to be "publicly accessible:"
Must be safe and publicly accessible by pedestrians (indoor or outdoor)
Indoor nominations are eligible, so long as they are publicly accessible to some capacity (e.g. inside a library or business with limited hours of operation)
Is this a change in policy from the preceding guideline that as long as someone, anyone, has access to the waystop at some point, it is eligible?
Post edited by NianticGiffard on
I don't see any difference. I does not have to be available to everyone, just some one.
Im interested in this too.
If "publicly accessible" means it is should be accessible to the public ALWAYS then its a big deal! This will rule out theme-parks only open some part of year and so on.
If "publicly accessible" means it should SOMETIMES be accessible to the public, then it would also be pretty easy to understand
The Sometimes/Always part pretty much makes up the whole difference on how to interpret this.
Well, this is still in the help:
Indoor vs Outdoor
Indoor nominations are eligible, so long as they are publicly accessible to some capacity (e.g. inside a library or business with limited hours of operation), and where small groups can congregate and play comfortably. Note that nominations on private residential property are ineligible.
As long as it is still in the help, I would assume "limited hours" are not a "rejectable" reason.
I've tried searching for the phrasing of the old guidelines, but to no avail. Did Niantic previously use the phrasing "publicly accessible?"
The temporal nature is one aspect of this. A seasonal theme park is publicly accessible, at least part of the year. Even if someone has to pay to enter, but anybody that pays can enter, that would still be publicly accessible. I don't think a locked and gated work facility is publicly accessible. They typically have signs that specifically state "no public access"
Disney World is open to the public.
Back stage at Disney has tours that make those areas accessible to the public.
There are, however, areas of Disney property that are not open or accessible to the public. Past guidance has been that if there are some employees that have access, it was an acceptable POI. This new phrasing doesn't seem to support this.
@JSteve0-ING Agree on the "publicly accessible to some capacity" part of the general guidelines. It definitely sounds like it is "Sometimes publicly accessible". Just would be nice if it was clarified under the acceptance criteria's because as I read it (with my nitty gritty glasses) right now "publicly accessible to some capacity" is only mentioned related to indoor stuff.
@donandlan-PGO Yea, the temporal part is what needs clarifed as it can be 'always' vs 'sometimes'... sometimes would make sense, but then it would just be nice to have it stated explicitly. As for the sign "No public Access", thats interesting, because if like only 3 people have access to something (working there?), it's at least not what I would understand by "publicly accessible". Same thing with a fountain within some corporate headquater where you would need an accesscard to enter..
So, does this mean that say, small islands that can only be reached by a private boat or row boat, arent ok, ad they arent publicly accessible by pedestrians?
And what about waypoints that are in out of bound areas like in a factory, a depot, the employee only areas in casinos (i saw that as an example of something thats ok), are these now not ok?
Small islands, dunno. Presumably, these islands are "publicly accessible," but are they what Niantic would consider, "Location is unsafe, without pedestrian access"
"Out of bounds," Depends on what Niantic is defining as "publicly accessible." That's what we're asking in this thread.
Hopefully @NianticCasey-ING can pop in and let us know how Niantic is defining this phrase.
For islands, I'm pretty sure that so long as there is a permanent mooring or dock, then any place on the island is then considered pedestrian accessible.
What if any places are 'limited' or 'restrictly' accessible?
It's clear that anything inside military bases are not 'publicly accessible', so what about anything within industrial area? For example, a mosque inside a factory is only accessible for the workers that work in the factory, but not for everyone else.
The islands im thinking of dont, they gave a beach to land on, but there's no actual way fir the general public to get there unless they own a boat either of the paddle variety or the yacht variety.
One Of the ones I'm thinking for out of bounds is st a goods in dock thsg the public most definitely isn't allowed into, its goverment property and the portal can only be accessed by one player (and whoevers account the bring i with them).
People are now using this (and the ignore previous AMAs bit) to say little free libraries are now acceptable in public easements between sidewalk and street. Niantic better reclarrify this again or they are going to get sued.
The guidelines are a step-by-step decision.
Step1: must meet one eligibility criteria. Public libraries are considered a great place to explore. Ok so far.
Step 2: must meet ALL acceptance criteria. First one is: permanent place or object. I would say, if a boat cafe is considered not permanent because it could be moved then a flower pot with a stick and a shelf with 5 books is very non permanent.
Step 3: must have zero rejection criteria. If it is not on private property and safely accessible Ok.
It would still be a reject because of step2.
Just because something can be moved doesn't mean it does move. If the reviewer reasonably thinks that the object is intended to remain in its location long-term without moving, then they should review accordingly, regardless of how much effort it might or might not take to move the object. So in both the case of the boat café and the case of the little free library, you need to think about how likely it is that it does move, not whether it can move. This should be done by the submitter providing evidence, the reviewer evaluating that evidence and any other relevant evidence, and the reviewer making a reasonable judgment based on the available information.
The language in the criteria states that if a "location, place, or object is temporary, or highly unlikely to be permanent," it is an automatic denial.
As always, it's up to the individual reviewer to determine how likely or unlikely a little library in a bucket or on wheels is to move at some point.
Sounds like we agree then. :) (I may have been editing my post when you started your reply, though, and my initial post before editing was not nearly as thought-out.)